chapter five
The addresshomoand the participleconversusare also typical of Luke.
In the synoptic gospels, the vocativeAνρωπεis to be found only in
Luke: : (Luke replaces Mark’sτ κνν); : (Luke’s special tradition);
:, (Luke rewrites Mark?). Mark does not use the wordστρ 1ωat
all, and in Matthew, Jesus “turns to” his disciples or supplicants twice:
Matt : and :. In Luke this happens seven times: :, ; :;
:; :; :; :. None of the occurrences is in Markan mate-
rial which would make them clearly editorial, but they are distributed
between Q passagesand Luke’s special material, which makes Luke’s edit-
ingmostprobable,atleastinsomeoftheoccurrences.Itshouldalso
to be noted that one of the occurrences (:) ofστρ 1ωprecedes
the Lawyer’s Question which seems to share several phrases with Ori-
gen’s passage. Furthermore,Aνρωπεis also to be found in the sec-
tion (Luke :–; a warning against avarice and the Parable of the
Rich Fool) that preceded the story about the rich man in theDiates-
saron.
The observations about typically Lukan language in Origen’s passage
are telling as such but the evidence will become even more forceful below
when we see how the Lawyer’s Question and the Parable of the Rich Fool
(with a preceding warning) were used by the author of Origen’s passage
when he put the story together.
There is certainly some room left for those who want to speculate about
the possibility that the writer of theGospel of the Hebrewsknew only
Matthew’s gospel. Two of the features that have been labeled Lukan in
the passage about the rich man can also be found in some Matthean
manuscripts.^21 However, these variants should be understood as later
since it includes severalminor agreements. Thus, some scholars assume that Luke did
not here follow Mark but used another source, possibly Q. See, for instance, Bovon ,
. However, J. Kiilunen’s detailed study of the passage shows that the similarities are
to be understood as a result of Matthew’s and Luke’s independent editorial work. See,
Kiilunen , –, –. Kiilunen’s arguments are summarized approvingly by Salo
, –, who also notes that in the whole double work, Luke avoids the question
of the greatest commandment. This observation also supports the view that the question
of the lawyer in Luke : stems from Luke’s pen. Overall, recent Q studies seldom
include Luke :– in Q, and it was also excluded by The International Q Project.
See Robinson, et al. , –; Kloppenborg Verbin , , n. .
(^21) Sinaiticus and some other manuscripts use a participial form of the verb “do.”
Nestle–Aland gives the following witnesses:L . (). .lpc(sys.c.hmg)(sams
bo)txtΒCΔΘ*. Furthermore, the phrase “everything that you have” (π%ντα =σα
6εις) is to be found, according to Huck & Greeven in Pseudo-Athanasius, Old
Latin, the Vulgate, Cyprianus, Irenaeus and Syriac translations. As a matter of fact, the
Old Syriac translations even have the same order of words as Origen’s passage (cf. below).